HORENSTEIN

JASCHA conducts
BRUCKNER
TISZT
WAGNER

First issued on LP in the 1950s

TıjK(s) @ Vox LEGEN0S . lvarca(s) Registrada(s) . Pranled in U's A.
lM
Waming: All Riqhts Reserued. Unauthorized duplication is a Vaolaıion o1 applicable
w
/T\
cDx 2-5504

vqıLrc:EıııIıs
@ & O 1992 THE MoSS MUSIC GRoUP, a division 0l Essex Entertainmenl, lnc.
560 Sylvan Ave., Englewood Clifls, NJ 07632
PI-EASE WRITE FOR A COMPLETE CTTAI,OG

It would not be incorrect, I beüeve, to call the basic Faust legend one of the oldest, if not most
populaı, in vestern religious folklore. The story of the wlse, iust man, tempt€d by evil and
either succumbing or refusing the temptation has becn the subject of counüess legends, poems,
and ballads.for centuries. Even the Book ofJob has something ln common wlth the Fıust legend
in the opening exchanges between God and satan in ıvhich the const]ınc} ofJob's hith is
discussed and finally put to the test. of course Job had nothing to say ln thls matter, ınd hıs
temptation consisted in merely denying his faith and cursing hls God, to say nothlng of the
fact that the mode of this temptation was exceedingly unpleasant to say the least.
The basic Faüst lcgend as known to us today had its beginning in the puppet pla1s ofmedteval
Europe. These little dramas were the connecting bridge between the earlier religious morality
plap and the secııiır theater that finally developed. The early veısions were a mixture of religion,
comedy (of the very earthy sort), philisophical meanderings, and a good hunk of pagan
mythology. The opening between God and the Devil ıvaş quite doıvn to earth. Faust himself
wııs a very odd blend of wisdom and foolery, and the plays as a whole were quite naivğ
Christopher Marloıye took these puppet plays as a starting point and wrote a very fine play,
Dı Faustus, which is still the süject of revivals from time to time, that contains the very hmous
descripüon of Helen of Tfoy; "The tıce that launched a thousand ships.'' From then on Faust
appeaıed in a number of versions for the stage, and a vast number of eaıly Faust operas were
brought out. These have disappeared, some with reason, others because Goethe's conception
rvas so fine that any other became second rate In hct, Spohr's rbus, is qüte a fine example
of early romanüc opera, but the book is quite aı variance with what we knoıv today as "Faust.''
Goethe's play, or poem, is a vast, sprawling work that is really quite unsüuble for the sage
in its complet€ form. There are certain scenes that are impossible to pmduce ıvithout destmyipg
the beauty of their literary content. Of course there have been productions both here and on
the conünent, but Goethe'sIbusü is really a most unsütable süiect. German composers have
always steered cleaı of it as a mattef of prudence; even Meyerbeer, who probably ırould have
made a huge success out of a Faust'opera,and who never let reverence for any subiect which
he thought would be "effectivd' stand in his way (such as a ballet of damned nuns in ioDeı,
the Da,it,bathing scenes in LeS Huguenots, and a skating sceneink Pıophdtğ wen Meyerbeer
was reported to have turned down the Barbier and Carr6 libretto saying that Iaus, rvas "the
-2-
Aık of the Covenant, notto be prchned ıpith music.'' Gounod üought otherwise aııd pıoceeded
to "profane" it with great success, although there is not much of Goethe in his ıvork.
Since Goethds countrymen decided against setting their own literary iewel, other composeıs
had no such compunctions, and a great number of woıks were produced using the play-poem
as theiı basis. Unfortunately, because of üıe vasüıess of the scope of this great poem, the libretti
of üese worlrs either had to be cut ruthlessly in order to present a cerain unity, as in Gounod's
case (rvhere a brief segment of the work was chosen), or the libretto became overburdened
with "plot'' and the final resıılt was disiointed, as in the case of Boito's tlefisnfele (which
tried to cram too much into too small a space). other composers' operaüc versions suffered
from the same trouble.
Berlioz tried to solve this by anoüer coırx.|ItsDamnaİion de Fauştşrcrıtınore in the diıection
of an impression of certain portions of the work, and did not aspire to be an opera. It was
a "dramatic cııtıİa'' suitable for performance on the concert stage. \r/hen it was staged as
a visual üama, the work lost a great deal of its power and has never really been successful
in this guise.
Franz Liszt perhaps hits on üe most successful soluüon. The Faust Symphony is less of
a musical description of Goethds poem, and more a personal musical expression of the work's
total effect on the composer. This type of work is most atypical of Liszt, who gloried in quite
literal effects, and whose larger symphonic poems are explicit to a point of over-elaborateness.
Here in the rbus t symphony ğrcn Liszt was held in check by the reverence he felt for this vast
poem. Before continuinS, I think it would be wise to point out that in the original German
rbusl is much more effective thın in tfanslation, especially English translation. The rvork is
wfitten in rhymed couplets, which in English can be perilously close to doggerel. The ıvork
in the original does not seem to give this impression, and this is one of the rsasons that non-
German composers had very littte fear in mutilating the work to theif oıvn satisfaction.
Now, Franz Liszt was never afuıid ofbeing "sensational.'' Personally, he rvas attractive to
ırcmen, his aftirs werc notorious, his mistıessş weıt ütled, and his illegitimaıe pmgeny legion.
Both as a man and ııs a composer he managed to combine with a great deal of success that
rather strzınge blend ofreligion and sex. In fuct, he ended his da1t as an abb't6, becıme very
ı
friendly with the Pope, and composed great deal of rather perfumed and epicene religious
-J-
 music.
fiıe idea for a&ust Symphony wu su88est€d to usztby berlioz' Damnation de Faust, wfuch
appeared in the 1840ş, Beılloz ln hls memolrs lelates that he had a visit from Liszt the day
before the former's ıvoık rccelved |ts 0rct performınce, ınd that they discussed Goethds ıvork,
ş,hich at the üme Llszt hed not ııs yet ıead, but whlch he şoon became enthusiastic about.
ten yeafs ıvert to pıss befoıe he started on the symphony, Shortty before he began
|lowever,
he ıvİot€ to his friend Prtncei's Sıyn-Mttgensteln thıt he enöünea'consldefi'ıe Jorut' rlort
the w.ork and felt that "anything by Goethe ls too dangerous for me to hendl€.,' Some time
lateı he expressed a certıİn attitude that "Faust seemed i dec'idedly bouryeolş chaıacter. . . hls
persondity-scatters and dissipates, he loses his way, and is oıılyinterestec ın his orvn petty
happiness." Despite this rıther odd statement, this treatment oiFaust is certainly onu oihi'
finest ıvoıks. The symphony was first performed in Veimr under the composer's baton on
December 5th, ı857. The work itselfwas completed three years before in the amazingly short
space oftwo months. In the intervening yeaıs Liszt experimented with the work aıid added
the final chorus(the work can be performed with or wiüout this closing section, but the chorus
adds a great deaı to it}
The symphony is in three movements and is more of an impression than a retelling of the
story in symphonic terms. The first movement' "Fa|.ıst," is an extraordinary musıcal
ğortrait
of the man (is the portrait offaust or Liszt?). It is a difficult movement ta anılyzebecaor.
ofits complexity, both musical and philosophical. It begins with a slow introduction stating
tıvo of üe principal themes, the fişt of ıvhich may be said to represent the magical nature
of Faust, and the second his emotional character. The music that iollows is frü oI storm and
stress in which moıe themes are added and the first two are elaborated upon in
iuxtaposition.
The movement ends with a dyirıg venion of the second theme, as if the main characar orpressed
a doubt as to his oıvn emotions.
The second movement, "Grerchen" (Maryuerite), be$ns with an intmduction in the flutes
and clarinets, ıvith a theme tha we mıy call the "Gıttchen themd' in the solo oboe accompanied
by the viola. The repeated phrase in the flute and clarinets has been called by many a depiction
of the young girl plucking the petals fıom a flower: "he loves me, he loves me not." A second
theme of a moıt amoıous feeling is heard in the fint violins. As this dies away the horns indicate
-4-
the presence of Faust and the music becomes more highly charged; theme's inteıtwine and
suggest the lovers' union. The movement ends ıvith a modified repetition of the first part,
in ıvhich the "he loves me not" theme is omitted, but the Faust theme is softly heard.
The final secüon, "Mephistopheles,'' uses the foregoing themes in parody. Liszt hit upon
this as the perfect way to express the spirit of negation. The devi-l cannot create, he can only
give forth a distorted image. A short introducüon markedıhonico sets the mood. The two main
"Faust themes" are broken and twisted; finally, the second of these is, after a very powerful
section, heard in a fugue for the strings. The movement rushes on savagely until a sudden
pianissimo brings in the "Grehhen theme," unsullied and pure; she alone is not touched by
negaüon. This respite is brief and the orchestra whips into furious stıtements until it reaches
a crest and seems to sink into ıveariness. The re-entıy ofthe "Gferchen theme' in the horn
and solo cello brings the ıvork into its final section. First the tıombones hint at the theme
and then after a slight paüse a male chorus begins to sing the chorus mysticus that ends the
second part of Goethe's poem. This is quite impossible to translate propeıly, giving its full
implications.
Alles Vergİngliche A]] that İs tnnsitory
Ist nur ein Gleichnis; Is merely a simile;
Das Unzulingliche The incomplete
Hier wird's Ereignis; Is here fıı[fi]]ed;
Das Unbeschreibliche The inexpressible
Hier wird's getan; Here is attained;
Das Ewig Veibüche The etemal feminine
Zieht uns hinan Dnws us onwatd
At the words "Ewig Veibliche" the tenor solo enters, singing the "Gretchen theme," soaring
higher and higher until the ıvhole passage is fepeated in solemn fanfares, İottissimo. Again
the soloist raises the "Gretchen theme'' to its heights and the ıvork ends in a triımphant calm.
During the ıvinter of 1839/40 young Vagner and his rvife Minna spent a miserable time in Paıis.
Vagner was struggling with the "Flying Dutchman, " and to keep himself alive he was forced
to write polkas and two-steps' and arrange other composers' ıvorks for the most unlikely
-5-
 instrumental combinıtıons(Le Prophtire for trombone and piano, for example). Under the all-
pervading influence of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony (a work that Wagner revered mightily)
he composed the Faust oveİtuİe. It was planned at first to be the first movement of a Faust
Symphony. The work rvas submitted to the Conservatoire and given a rehearsal reading by
them, but rvas reiected as being "too enigmatic." It was performed in Dresden in lB44 and
was a comflete failure This is not surprising, as the work is cast in the same dark idiom as
the Flying Dutchman, rvhich was also a complete mystery to its first hearers. Liszt however
saw in it seeds of greatness and performed it in Ifeimar a few years later, and afterwards gave
Whgner a few suggestions for reworking the score. Vagner seemed most grateful for these,
but answered Uszt that the ıvork could best be termed "Faust in Solitude'' (Lisz had sug8ested
a Gretchen melody). He went on to say that the "feminine hovers over his imagination like
a phantom of his unknown desires," and that the rvork was merely the fragment of a larger
one he had never completed. Ifthe present version were ever published, Vagner continued,
it would be a symphonic poem called Soliary Faust. However, the work was not published
at the üme and it was not until 1855 when Vagner heard that Liszt was in the middle of a
faust ıvork of his own that lfagner returned to his early work.. He wrote Liszt that ". . . absurdly
I have been seized by a vivid desire to rework the old Iausf oveıture, and have composed
an entirely neıtr score. In a few days I shall produce it at a local concert (Zurich). . . in no case
shall I publish it." The performance was given and Liszt subsequently received a copy of the
score Through him it ıvas published.
The rvork as it stands today is ıather unique. Its second version was composed whileDie
watkiiıe wıs in progress and ias rtü eingotd was completed. The work op.n'
a terse and
rather somber passage that resolves into a weird figure that is quite lfagnerian. 'oith
This is follorved
by a beautiful section in the maior mode, suggesüve of salvation, that is interrupted by a savage
outburst in the orchestra and subsides mouınfully into a passage for the violins where the
main theme assumes a definite shape. A loud crash and a pause tbllow, and a rapid passage
begins and rushes to a climax, ıvhich introduces a figure that bears out the contention that
the work was conceived under the influence of Beethoven's Ninth. The ıvork continues with
a t€$eness and economy ofstyle üat is quite unusual for Vhgner. The second subiect, beautifiılly
-6-
scored and in the style of Elsa's music in Lohengrin, begins softly. The tnusic increases in
intensity, then gives şny to a feeling of despaiı that submerges the entire orchestra. At last
the vioüns remain with a vague reminiscence of the fifst subiect. The violins swing upward,
and the ıvork ends as though bathed in the light of daıvn.
İranzliszt once compared Richard Vagneı's Nibelungen tetraıogy to an enormous mountain
range This very appropriate meaphor can also be appüed to the symphonic creations of Anton
Bruckner. Iike immense icy peala rising to lofty heights above the vallep and humuı settlements,
Bruckner's symphonies form a mighty range culminating in the majesüc and granüose Eighth.
This was the last symphonic work that its creator was able to give to the rvorld in a complete
form. In his sheer titanic struggle over the finale of the Ninth, Bruckner succumbed to a deadly
illness, leaving behind the Ninth as the gleatest torso of musical literature Bruckneı commenced
the Eighth in 1884. He was then sixty years of age and only on the threshold of success and
recognition. Not one of his three great masses nas printed and only one of seven symphonies
published (the Fifth and Seventh were still unperformed). The events that turned tha tide in
his favor üd not occur in Vienna, but in Germany. Bruckner's Vienna was also the Vienna
of Eduard Hanslick and Hans Richter. Both were powerfiıl men: Hanslick was the critic of the
most influential Austrian Newspape r , Neue Fıeie Pıesse , and Hans Richter held four important
musical posiüons in the Imperial city. He was conductor of the Court Opera, presided over
the Philharmonic orchestra and the choral concerts of the society of triends of Music, and
also conducted in the court chapel. An excellent musician of imposing appearance, he was
no doubt a clever diplomat. A wagnerian high-priest in Bayreuth and in the vienna opera,
he charığioned the cause of Bnhms in the Philharmonic concerh and steeıed clear of Bruclner.
ln so doing he secured the benevolence of Hanslick and the conservatives. He was elected
conductor of the vienna Philharmonic in 1875 and throughout the first decade of his tenure
he did not program even one Bruckner symphony. Small ıvonder when Bruckner, deeply hurt
by this attitude, spoke ofRichter as "the generalissimo ofdeceit.'' True, in 188ı Richteı led
the Philharmonic orchestra in a performance of the Romantic symphony
- but it was not
in the Philharmonic series. on that occasion he and his musicians did not run the risk of
-7-
offending the conservaüve taste of theif subscribers and ifritating the hosüle leading music
critics by promoüng an Austrian composer who went his own aıtistic ways.
The decisive turn in Bruckner's long and bitter struggle for recogniüon came in 1884 with
the first performance of the Seventh Symphony in Leipzig under the baton of Arthur Nikisch.
It was not an overwhelıning success but the brilliant musicianship, enthusiasm, and
d€t€rmination ofNikisch, then twenty-nine years ofage, won a victory for his neglected friend.
And ten weelıs laıer (March l88) the symphorıy scored a resounding triumph in Muniü under
Hermann Lrvi. Tlıis event had far_reaching repercussions. Nikisch, although being then an
accorıplished master of the baton, was still in the ııscendancy to fame. His position as first
conductor at the Municipd Theater in teipzig did not carry the greıt prestige of the post of
a Hofkapellmeister such as the one occupied by Hermann Irvi in Munich. Levi's high artistic
strnding had been lifted to an extraordinıry degree by Richard Vagner, who had conferred
upon him the great honor and high privilege of conducting the first performan ces oİ Pa$ihl
in Bayreuth. fiıe frrt that a musician of highest artistic standing and social pıestige championed
the cause of a composer hitherto unknown _ Ifvi had neveı heard the name before _ Richter and the Philharmonic oıchestra. It was plıyed on December |8,1892, and was ıeceived
benefitted Bruckner not only in Germany but also in his native land. His stock began to rise
in Vienna and Richter finally introduced in t886 the Seventh in the Philhaımonic Concerts.
It was during these two eventfııl years that the [ighth Symphony came into being.
Bruckner began the composiüon in the summer of 1884 and concluded the sketch in August
1885. "The composiüon of the Eighth is completed," wrote Bruc'kner to Leyi on September
7, 1885, but he added "I wish the work were also finished," meaning completed in score.
It took him two mofe yea$ to complete üis task. "Hallelujah! The [ighth is ıeağ at last and
'my hther inart' (kiinstleischeİ |İateİ) should be the first to receive the news," reported
Bruckner to L€vi on September 4, 1887. About two weeks later he dispatched the score to
Munich, elated by hope and the indescribable ioy of haüng the symphony performed through
Ievi's "masterly hand." I€vi lost no time in sfudying the score, but did not have a hvofable
impression ofthe new symphony. Being a sincere friend ofBruckner, Irvi found himselfin
a painfrıl predicament. IIe did not dare to face the composer even by letters and to tell him
of his own inability to undeıstand the new work and to admit his lack of courage to perfofm
it. Irvi was fiılly aware ofthe terrible shock this bad news ıvas bound to have on Bruckner,
-E-
and he appealed to Josef Schalk, one of Bruckner's most trusted pupils, for help Schalk
undertook this sad mission and informed his master of Levi's reiection. This message caused
Bruckner to suffer a nervous collapse and he even enteraiıied thoughts of suicide Nwertheless
he continued his corrcspondence with L'evi and expıessed his willingrıess to ıarise the symphony.
In the meantime he had commenced the Ninth and taken up the revision of thoThiıd
il symphony. The revision of the Eighth was_ elventually carried out between August lggg and
March 1890. But the pıosp€cts of a performince in Munich were gone, because ıevı had retıred
ı from the direction of the concerts. He recommended Felix rreingartner in Mannheim, who
consent€d to program the Eighth duıiiıg the Vinter season of l89l, and Bruckner looked forıvard
to the performance with excitement. Meanwhile weingartner received an appointment as
conductof of the Court operı and the Conceıts of the Royal orchestra in Berlin and he left
Mannheim prior to the end of the season. This unexpected change also dashed the hopes for
a Mannheim performance of the Eighth, but after having run the gamut of disappointment
and despaiı, Bruckner had the great saüsfaction of having the symphony accepted by Hans
ıvith great enthusiasm. Even Hanslick and the Brahms partisans acknowledged Bruckner's
success. Hugo Vblfcalled it '? complete victory ofthe light over the daıkness" and Bruckner,
deeply moved and forgivjng the humiliaüons of the past, expressed his sincerest thanks to
Richter and the members of "the highest artistic society in music.'' Empeıor Franz Joseph
accept€d the dedication of the symphony, which appeared simulaneous\ in 1892 in Vienna
ı and Berlin.
At this iuncture we must deal briefly with a problem that is unique in musical history. In
the early 1920s rumors began to circulate that the first eütions of Bruckner's symphonies,
x
published during his lifetime, except for the Sixth and Ninth, do not represent the artistic
intentions of the composer. These rumors were substantiated to some degree by the gradual
ıppea;İance of the critical Genmtausgabe foı ırhich Robert Haas, professor at the Vienna
Univeısity and head ofthe Music Division ofthe Austrian National Ubrary, was responsible.
Bruckner had willed his manuscripts to this venerable institution, and Haas was the logical
choice foı the editorship of the C'esamkusgabe, issued by the National Library (formerty Court
Library) in Vienna and the International Bruckner Society. The comparaüve study of the
-9-
autogrııph scofes and first editions revealed substantial differences between these sources. This
unaccountable and puzzling situation could not be explained because, strangely enough, the
printer's copies (Saiclıvoİwen), which formed the connecting link between Bruikner's autograph
scores and the first editions, could in most cases never be pıoduced. Thus there was ın the
opinion of Haas and others no authentic source for the alt€fations, omissions, and instrumental
changes evident in the published scores. In accordance ıvith the editoıial principles of the
Complete [diüon, the first editions of ıvhich ıvere used all over for about half a century, were
not considered as verified by the composer and regarded "as arrangements by other hands."
They were discarded ııs source mat€riaJ, for it was the avowed and oııly purpose of the Complete
Ediüon to present Bruckner's creations in their ori$nal version (oiğnalfassung,). This term
must not be confused, as often is the cıır-,withllıhssung (very first version). ,,0riğnalhssung',
in the t€rminology ofthe Complete Edition means the veısion extant in Bruckner's autograph
that he consideıed the final form for presentation to the public. How the editorial practice
conformed to the editorid theory we will learn later.
Thepublicaüon of the original versions caused a heated controversy about the authenticity
-
of the first editions and resulted in a campaign against those whom Haas cıllcdthe Pnktiket,
who were charged with the responsibility for the "distortions." These ,,practical ones', were,
as everybody knew, primarily Bruckner's pupils Ferdinand üiwe and the brothers Franz and
Josef Schalk. True, in the discussion of many specific cases as presented in the very scholarly
r€ports atached to the individual volumes of the Complete Ediüon, neiüer üiwe nor the Schalk
brothers were openly charged with ampefing ıvith the original text. Nevertheless, a legend
impugning the memory ofthese deserving Bruckner apostles wzs created and often circulated
by pmple who, ignorant of the complexity of the problem and the related facts, ıaised their
voices and accused üiwe and Schalk of editorid crimes without offering proofs to substantiate
üe charges. It is obvious üat the copies that went to the printer must have born the composer's
signature and this ıvould to all intents and purposes constitute ı de hoo authentication of
the alterations and changes maöe in the originat text. Takin8 üe possibility into account that
the lost pfint€r's copies bearing Brucknert sigrıature might some day come to [ght, Haas insisted
that alterations and instrumental changes w€fe wrung from Bruckner under duress, and he
_ l0-
went even so far as to speak of "sanctions" imposed upon the helplesS composer.
Music is created to be performed and the creaüng artist needs the performer. The suggesüons
offered to Bruckner by such eminent musicians and distinguished conductors asJohann Herbeck,
Hermann Levi' Arthur Nikisch, and Franz Schalk resulted fıom their practical experience and
convinctions gained at ıehearsals and performances. Even Beethoven heeded the advice given
by friends, and one needs only to remember the protracted session in the Pılace of Prince
Lichnowsğ when the reıvorking of the ownlmnorc was discussed. It should not be overlooked
that Bruckner had heard his works (except the Fifth and Ninth) and was very much in a position
to observe and to iudge the merits ofthe ideas his friends and advisers offered. The very intricate
question as to ıvhether the original versions or the first editions should be used for performances
is by no means conclusively ansıvered yet. The present writer, who had in his student days
not only the opportunity ofhearing Bruckner's compositions under the direction ofüiwe and
Schalk, but rvas also privileged to play them when they first presided over the orchestra, is
not pfepafed to discard the fişt editions as axrangemens and accept the original versions instead.
Excluding the first edition ofthe Ninth for which Lİwe accepted the responsibility, the case
is far from being closed since a nerv eütorial poticy was esıablished for the Complete Edition
and first applied to the Eighth Symphony.
After üe collapse of the Thiıd Reich,forwhox'Kıılturplitik üe promotion of Anton Bruckner
and the Complete Edition was an impoftant mno.Drn, Robert Haas ıvas reliwed from the editorship
ofthe Complete Vbrls and replaced by leopold Nowak' Noü"k's first achi€vement in this cayicity
was a new edition ofthe [ighth. Published in the spıing of 1955 the new score definitely is
to supersede the edition presented by Haas in 1939. It is used for the present recording. Nowak
explains in the forervord that Haas' edition, which bears the designatioil "oriğnalhssung''
on the title page, actually represents a combination of rrvo versions: the first version of 1887
relected by Levi and the veısion of 1890, Needless to say, this score cannot be claimed as
-
-
representing Bruckner's ultimate artistic intention, and Nowak's categorical reiection of the
method Haas applied in this paıticular case and to the Second Symphony, one must add
-
is a declaration of war against the editorial policy hitherto followed in the Complete Edition. -
The new edition dropped the designation "Ori$na.l Version" and defines the score as "Version
of 1890." It marks a turning point in the issuance of the Complete Edition and we can expect
-ıı_
the repubücation ofother "revised original versions'' that will differ from the versions edited 1955) that the version of 1890 comes close to the first edition, rvhich is andther way of saying
by Haas. Matters will become moıe complex, the student more bewildered, and the listener thaı this criücizd and mdiıgıed edition actually follows the version of 1890. It differs structurally
utterly confused. As for the Eighth we have to consider the following sources: only once from Bruckner's autograph. In the exposiüon of. the Finahe there is a six-measure
reminiscence of the Adagio of the Seventh that Bruckneı had removed from the corıesponding
l. the version of 1887 (rğected by lrvi; publicaüon in pıeparation)
part in the recapifuIııtion. Nowak admitted the inconsistency but ıeiısed to eliminat€ the passages
2. the version of 1890 (published Maıch 1955 and used foı this ıecoıünğ
the first ediüon of 1892 in accordınce with the first edition.
3.
The symphorıy is scoıed for 3 flutes, 3 oboes, 3 clarinets, 3 bassoons (the third interchangeable
4. the edition ofthe Complete Vorks, Vol. V[I, edited by Haas
with contra-bassoon), 8 horns (of rvhich 4 are interchangeable ıvith Nibelungen tubas), 3
The version of 1887 employs only woodrvind pairs (two flutes, two oboes, etc.) and shoıvs trumpets, 3 trombones, I double bass tuba, 3 kettledrums, cymbal and triangle (in the third
a different sequence of the middle movements (Adagio Scherm). The first movement
-
concludş with a powerfrıl Jffpassage (ıeproduced in Volume W, 2 of Auer's Bruclrner biography);
movement), 3 harps (in the second and third movements), and strings.
The ffrst movement' Allegm modento' displays a clear-cut sonata form. There is a thıee-
the kheno has a Trio different from that familiar to us. The climax in the ,Magio occuıs in part exposition, a three-part delvelopment, and a three-part recapitulation. Even a brief analysis
C maior (E-flat maior in the later version). The version of 1887 was considerably longer than would require much space and numeıous musical examples. Thus our discussion must be
that of 1890 (üe basis ofthe first edition) as the folloıving diagram ofvarying measures shows: confined to a fEv outstanding features. The C minor Symphony opens in F minor and the tonic
is only touched en Pı'ŞSant' The second theme shows a favorite rh1thm of Bruckner, already
First Second Secoıd First
Veısion Yersion Edttion apparent in the main theme. The first dynamic cümaıı is folloıved by a modified rest tement
Yersion
(r890, (ı890' (ı892) of the opening theme in the bass, accompanied by a violin tremolo en very high position. The
(r887)
development opens with a didogue between üe tubas and oboe. Later a tremendous climax
Haas) Nowalı)
reaches its peak in the combination of both the first and second themes in augnıentaüon. The
First Mov't 453 417 417 417
recapitulation shorvs a different picture from the exposiüon. The theme is stated by the oboe
Scherzo. 2W 195 195 195
in C minor, but there is a counter melody in D-flat, announced by the flute
Trio.... 93 93 93 -
one of the
first examples ofpolytondity. There is another c[max in the closing gfoup, but its poıVef is
Adagio . 329 301 29r 29r
spent rapidly and thereafter only thematic fragments are heard to the end of the movement.
Finale .. 771 747 7W 705
A piece of perfect regulaxity (ABA)' the Scherzo (Allegns modenn) exhibits tıro contrrısting
In its first version the symphony was a creaüon of enormous dimensions that had bewildered elements: the flutterin8 tremolo of the violins and the stuğ, stocky phrase first announced
Levi, and the subsequent reproduction brought about conciseness and gıeater coherence. The by the violas and the violoncellos. originally associated ıvith Bruckner's friend Almeroth, the
procedure, practiced by Haas, to restore pııssages removed by Bruckner can by no means be technique later came to be regarded by the composer as a musical symbol of the Deursclıer
condoned. dthough considering the purification of Bruckner's works as his foremost editorial Michel. The Trio in A-flat also shoıys the ABA design and is almost an adağo in character.
ıask, Haas nevertheless inserted, as 'brganically vital,'l passages that Bruckner himselfhad The Adagio inD-flat maioı (İeierlich langum; doch nicht schleppend
eliminated after careful deliberaüon. Nowak points out(oesteneichjsche Musikzeischift, May
-Solemn and slow
but not dragging) is perhaps the longest in symphonic literature. It is a sonat4 movement of
-12- _ ı3-
very great dimensions and deviates significantly from the ordinary pattern. The basic form
is clearly preserved. The exposiüon contains four theme complexes, which are manipulated
in the development but partly omitted in the recapitulation.
TheFinale (Feİerlİdı, nic[ıt rchnell _ solemn, not hst) is a sonata movement of o<traordinary
niıa noıwştan([9&l973) ıvas born in Kiev and trained in Vienna, wher€ he was bmught
up in the high noon of Richard strauss, veingartner and rurtwangkr. He brought-to music
a'unıçe neıi'tage
- that of the long line of the greaı dassical tradiüon fused with the ğnamism

proportions: of all ihe new iusic ranging fıom Matıler and Strauss to schoenbefg, Berg and Barto*. ryo"r'
Holenst€in is ıanked as-one ofthe gfeatest conductofs ofthe classics, especially bmed as a
Exposiüon 252 measures Mahler and 8eethoven int€rprct€r, and as one of the most excitin8 exponents of the music
Development 184 measures of Bruckner, Berg, Baıtok, Janacek, Hindemith and stravinsky to be heard in this century.
Recapitulation 210 measures Horenstein *.i philosophy at the University of Vienna and music at the Vienna
Coda 63 measures Academy, when he 'tuoyıng
decidedto devote himselfenürely to conducting, thanks to the eıco.urace-
There are three theme complexes: the eneryetic main idea, a carillon motive effecting the ment oi Furtwöngler. He made his debut in 1924 with the Vienna symphony oJchestra,
transition o a mild choral melody, and the closing theme characterized by falling fourths. The conducting Mahlei's Symphony No. l. From 1925 İa 1928, he was conductor of the Beflin
symphony-orchest a, and in 1929 wıs appointed director of the Dusseldorf opeıa, where he
dwelopment shoun tıvo divisions, each ending with a great dynamic climax. Almost the entire
thematic material of the exposition is manipüated and appears in contrapuntal combinations. remained until 1933.
In the mid_thirties Horenstein expanded his careeı both eastward and westward, diüding
The recapitıılaüon enters in full force Elaborating on the main ideas, it uses powerful dynamic
doelopments that aıe topped in the coda. The coda begins pianissimo in C minor and increases his seasons among the Brussels Philharmonic, the Vienna Symphony, the Varsaw Philhar-
gradually in power and sonority. The climax is reached with the turn to the maior key and monic and Sate o,pera, the Moscow and Leningrad Philharmonic orclresras, and the Iameuıeux
then the tonic is victoriously mainained thmughout the last twenty-thrce measuıts. The dynamic and orchestre symphonique ofParis' In 1938, he toured Australia and New 7nalaıdııdn
1939 was one of thi four conductors who shaıçd the leadership of the Palestine Philharmonic
climax is mıtüed musically and spiritually through the combinıtion of the main idea of all
four movements: with Arturo lbscanini.
Horenstein came to the U.s. in 1941, where he appeared wiü the New York Philharmonic_
I-in basses, tıombones, doublebass tuba, bassoons Svmphony Society and other outstanding ofchestras. He also made frequent tours of Lıtin
II-in flutes, clarinets, trumpets eroio, ,no |94] wuin conştant demand throughout Europe' at the Concertgebouw
III-in horns of Amsterdam, 'ini.
the Conservatoire and National Orchestra of Paris, La Scala in lılilan, the B.B.C.
lV-in tubas and London symphony orchestıaş in london, the Brussels Philharmonic, the Santa Cecilia
In the conclusion of the symphony the unification of üsparate elements is nobly achieved; of Rome, the Rome Radio orchestra, and at the Florence May Fesüval.
and the maior triad emerges victorious, elevated to sublime heights amid overwhelming
orchestral splendor.
JosEPH BRAUNSITıN
(A Vox Irgend Himsel!
_ı5_